Tuesday, 22 May 2012

Matthew Herbert: evil imbecile

Via Tim Worstall, I see the Guardian has published the ramblings of another meat-hating, ban-loving food faddist. No time to fisk this, but I have filleted the choicest cuts for you...

The slippery slope...

The government tells shops to hide cigarettes behind the tills, but allows them to set up mazes of crisps, chocolate and sweets that we are forced to walk through to get to the till.

Failure to understand the purpose of advertising...

We also allow food companies to advertise junk food to our children – but as far as I know, everybody likes crisps; it's not like we need encouraging to eat more of them.

Choice is an illusion. Removing choice gives us freedom...

Responsibility is constantly deferred downwards to us as though the food system is a benign force simply there to offer us choice and let us get on with it. But those decisions are impossible ones to make in a deceitful system like this. Take for example the report by the Pesticide Residues Committee, which states that wholemeal loaves contain significantly more toxic residues in them than white loaves due to the milling process. Yet nutritionally, brown loaves are much better for you. Less toxic, or less nutritious: how are we supposed to make that choice? We shouldn't even have to.

Stupid idea for a new law...

If I had more time, I'd start a campaign called See Your Food, which would demand the legal right to be able to witness how our food was made, reared, killed, prepared and packaged.

More stupid ideas for bans...

We need bigger solutions: bring back rationing for fish immediately, end the majority of advertising for highly processed foods, introduce the compulsory teaching of cooking in schools, reverse the rise in meat consumption, legalise much higher welfare standards for animal husbandry, ban GM foods.

The author...

Matthew Herbert is a British electronic musician

Never heard of him. I hope I never hear from him again. Get back to your synthesizer, sir.

7 comments:

Please fuck off and leave the grown up to make their own informed/ill-informed decisions. If you fancy the sort of food control you propose, North Korea is over there. I'm sure they'll be most appreciative of your synthesised odes to Kim Wrong-Un

Wholesalers have branded the tobacco display ban at their depots “a right pain in the a***”.

The ban, which came into force just over a month ago, means wholesalers have to ensure all tobacco products they sell at their depots are covered on their way from tobacco rooms to checkout areas.

All tobacco products have to be hidden from view in transit to prevent them from being seen by non-tobacco retailers. This means that all products leaving tobacco rooms must be concealed by either a cover, a box or a bag. This must be sealed when a customer leaves the tobacco room and then reopened to be processed at the checkout. Products must then be resealed and covered before leaving the depot. Tobacco room windows also have to be covered to hide products from view.

The whole process was “a complete nightmare”, according to a source at a leading wholesaler. “It’s a right pain in the a*** because we have to cover products up from the tobacco room to the checkout and change the bags into boxes. It’s driving us mad.”

The source added that he knew of wholesalers that “were putting two fingers up to it all and not doing it”, claiming that Trading Standards had not “got to grips with it yet”.

Wholesalers are against the display ban because their depots are only used by the trade, and not by members of the public.

The ban was implemented to discourage children from smoking, but the vast majority of wholesalers do not allow children into their depots.

Another wholesale source said: “It is a nightmare, but it could have been a lot worse.”

The Grocer reported in December last year that wholesalers had been left baffled by the “over the top” display rules, with one source branding the ban as “ill thought-out and burdensome”.

Just noticed: Should the title of this post be Matthew Herbert: Evil Imbecile instead of Michael?

Anyway, in respect of "this country sucks" I think we "sinners" should consider invading and taking over the Isle of Wight or something. We'll rename it the Isle of Freedom. And there, we shall allow adults to make their own choices. It will be nanny-free. Hell, maybe we'll just ban children under 16 altogether...

Re Harley's note on the covering of products: we need a campaign pushing TShirts with big flashy colorful cigarette brand logos. Unfortunately the tobacco companies are probably cowed enough at this point that they'd feel compelled to sue on the basis of copyright infringement or be held liable for taking advantage of the free advertising.

And, regarding this:

"If I had more time, I'd start a campaign called See Your Food, which would demand the legal right to be able to witness how our food was made, reared, killed, prepared and packaged."

About Me

Writer and researcher at the Institute of Economic Affairs. Blogging in a personal capacity.
Author of Selfishness, Greed and Capitalism (2015), The Art of Suppression (2011), The Spirit Level Delusion (2010) and Velvet Glove, Iron Fist (2009).

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."